Would you do something?

[Frances]

25 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I don't have much worry about the father - more on the impact his loss of an income will have on his kids. Will his kids end up on the street because mom can't afford her rent without child support? No idea. Will people be saved because the pot this kid was importing was tainted? No idea. Will someone die because instead of buying this kid's pot they buy from someone else and get tainted drugs that way? No idea. Is there a steady stream of gun toting gang members going in and out of this apartment complex putting others in danger as they show up day and night to buy their pot? Or is it that every 3 months he coordinates a group buy and among snap chat friends and acquaintances and meets them somewhere public to make the exchange? No idea. 

Which was kind of my point - there are a ton of variables here. And because of that it isn't as simple (to me) as "it is illegal, therefore report it". 

But none of us have a crystal ball to see what will happen with both reporting and not reporting. It seems pretty obvious the father is making very poor choices concerning both of his jobs and his children. If we can’t know the outcome, it seems more prudent to me to error on the side of reporting, especially given the worsening situation Dawn described, and hoping for the best possible outcomes for everyone involved. What’s the other option? Do nothing and hope things magically turn around. He knows his son needs help, he was given the information to help him, and he hasn’t acted on it. It sounds like he needs some sort of wake up call, and better this than someone ending up hurt or dead due to all of the illegal activity.

While a different scenario, it reminds me of a story in the news here lately about two parents just convicted of starving one of their adopted children to death. Several daycare teachers and relatives suspected something, but the parents always had answers for their concerns. But both police detectives and DHS workers interviewed about the case urged people to report suspicions because they often reveal more serious underlying circumstances.

[Frances]

23 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

It isn't what DSS would do that I was talking about - it was about the criminal ramifications. And by no means is our justice system, well, particularly just when it comes to drug crimes. 

Now, if this is a white kid, his chances are way better, so there is that. 

I’d be pretty surprised if the eighteen year old wasn’t offered some sort of rehabilitation and probation for a first offense. Plea bargaining would be very common in a case like this, at least here. And the father may have union representation to assist him with any legal issues of his own.

[katilac]

5 hours ago, Katy said:

I'm pretty sure that unless it's a large quantity people who ship pot from California to other states use UPS or Fed Ex, which keeps it as a misdemeanor.  At least that's what I was told as a college kid when someone I knew got a shipment from a friend.

I don't think that's possibly correct. I can't find a definitive link, but I'm going with nah, lol. 

[DawnM]

6 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

I don't have much worry about the father - more on the impact his loss of an income will have on his kids. Will his kids end up on the street because mom can't afford her rent without child support? No idea. Will people be saved because the pot this kid was importing was tainted? No idea. Will someone die because instead of buying this kid's pot they buy from someone else and get tainted drugs that way? No idea. Is there a steady stream of gun toting gang members going in and out of this apartment complex putting others in danger as they show up day and night to buy their pot? Or is it that every 3 months he coordinates a group buy and among snap chat friends and acquaintances and meets them somewhere public to make the exchange? No idea. 

Which was kind of my point - there are a ton of variables here. And because of that it isn't as simple (to me) as "it is illegal, therefore report it". 

 

His kids will end up back with their mom, who has a decent income.

And since you, nor I, have any idea of the ramifications of reporting or not reporting it, I will continue to do what I need to do ethically, morally, and legally.

[ktgrok]

7 hours ago, EmseB said:

I'm speaking to moral culpability as well (though my post was confusing because I did speak of both moral and legal aspects,  sorry!).

To be more clear: someone reporting illegal activity does not bear moral culpability for consequences of said illegal activity even if the perpetrator is caught because of the report. There may be reasons why a person wouldn't want to report a crime, but trying to figure out what might happen to a criminal, to their family, as if the reporter could predict those things or could be morally responsible for them would be madness.

Thank you for explaining your position. I disagree with your position, but appreciate you spelling it out. To me, there is no way to distance the actions taken by me reporting and the outcomes. I'm NOT saying reporting is wrong, just trying to explain that people who feel differently are not arriving at their conclusions due to a lack of morality or respect for ethics or what not, but due to reaching a different conclusion within just a strong a moral compass, just a different one. 

Given the amount of issues with our justice system, the number of times a parent reported their own child in an attempt to get them help only to have it spectacularly backfire (something I've had reason to think on a lot given that there was a point where I worried I'd be in that category with my ASD teen - thankfully it never came to that).....the actual outcome is something that would be of concern for me. 

For me, the point of reporting would be to make the world better - to have positive outcomes more than negative ones. And if I thought that my reporting would create more negative outcomes than good I very well might not report. Especially adding in that reporting would also possibly make a target of my own minor son, who is innocent in all this. 

Some have expressed that they would report out of a hope it would make things better for the neighborhood as well as the people directly involved (maybe not the father, I agree he's the least sympathetic figure in this scenario). That they think it would be the best way for the teen dealing to turn his life around, etc. I don't have enough details to agree, but appreciate the reasons. 

What I don't agree with is the attitude expressed by a very few, that they don't really care what happens to the teen, etc. That for them it is black and white, it is a crime and anyone who commits a crime deserves whatever our bizarre justice system throws at them. If a teen ends up with a ruined life, well, he had it coming, not something to care about one bit. And if the reporter's own son gets targeted, that isn't a concern to be factored in at all. It is 100 percent a matter of always report a crime, because it is a crime. For me it is much more nuanced, and I guess I was feeling like people were implying not a very black and white good people/bad people approach that not only turns the teen dealing into a bad person but anyone who wouldn't report into an unethical one as well. 

1 hour ago, DawnM said:

 

His kids will end up back with their mom, who has a decent income.

And since you, nor I, have any idea of the ramifications of reporting or not reporting it, I will continue to do what I need to do ethically, morally, and legally.

I don't think I saw any details about her income, how much they rely on say, the father's insurance if they can get the teen into rehab, etc etc. I admit I'm treating this more as a thought experiment at this point as anything. 

I do think you and anyone else should do what they need to ethically, morally, etc. (not sure about legally....again I guess I have a large civil disobedience streak,lol) But I resent any implications that people who come to different conclusions are not acting ethically or morally. Perhaps no one meant the implication but that's how it seemed. 

[TravelingChris]

On 10/31/2019 at 11:22 AM, SKL said:

Maybe the effect on younger kids was different from the effect on older teens.  As would be the case for most teen and "young adult" fiction.

I do appreciate your input.  Like any book, different people will respond differently.  It was incredibly popular for a reason.  I do remember it was sort of under the table ... a friend "secretly" lent it to me - I think many parents were afraid of it.  That part is kind of hilarious - because it was not a dangerous book IMO.  Even though it introduced dangerous behaviors, it did not make me or my friends want to try any of that.

I do think the effect was different with younger people. I was younger when I read it but it didn't affect me as much as two other things--- The Mad magazine poster of a heroin junkie I saw as a young kid (and so did my dh. We both had older sibling(s) who got Mad Magazine).  And then "THat was Then, This is Now" which was an admittedly fictional book.

[Storygirl]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/celebrity/shia-labeouf-thanks-police-officer-who-arrested-him-in-2017-for-changing-my-life/ar-AAJQFqc

I thought this was interesting in a relevant way. Sometimes getting into trouble is what turns a person's life around for the better.

[DawnM]

19 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

 

Yes - I was comparing them to the quote by Valley Girl below. She wasn't talking about the legality, she was talking about marijuana being poison, putting people at risk, and ruining lives. Pretty sure the statistics will say that alcohol does all that as well. So I was asking if she also has that kind of animosity to people selling alcohol, tobacco, etc which are as dangerous if not more so. If she doesn't, than that would put the focus on the legality not the things she mentioned. 

 

 

Again, there is a significant difference to many many people between marijuana and say, assaulting or killing people. 

Wanting a man's family to be devastated financially, and a teenager to have a lifelong felony conviction that may keep him from ever being gainfully employed, over a substance that arguably does less harm than alcohol, is a pretty extreme stance to take on pot. Is it his fault? Sure. But will good come of it? 

 

And you know what?  Having kilos of pot at your house puts you (and everyone else around) in danger of guns coming around, which would cause assaulting or killing.  If this family had a couple kids with some nickle bags, I wouldn't be nearly as upset.  I prob wouldn't have done anything.  

So, yeah, it is on the "danger" spectrum for me.

[annandatje]

On 11/3/2019 at 4:52 PM, Catwoman said:

 

Or... the police officer father should have thought about the possibility of losing his job and his retirement benefits before he allowed his son to deal drugs.  This goes way beyond “making some poor parenting decisions,” and it is made even worse by the fact that the father’s job is to uphold and enforce the law. 

Are we really supposed to give someone a pass for committing crimes because stopping that person from being a criminal would have a negative financial impact on his family?  That seems ridiculous to me.  Where do we draw the line? How bad does the crime have to be before a person should be reported? If dealing drugs isn’t enough, what is? Would you really be the family friend who said,  “Oh, well, of course everyone knows that Bob Smith is robbing people, killing them, and tossing their bodies in the dumpster behind Taco Bell, but his family is so nice and they need that money, so we all decided not to report him.”

I should have clearly stated that I do not believe marijuana is especially harmful, which is primarily why I would pass.  Of course,  financial distress would not be a deterrent to a crime I would report.  We have no solid information from original poster that subpar father/officer is involved in the marijuana sales.  With nationwide eternal electronic records, a drug conviction for a drug I consider harmless could affect the young adult's ability to get loans for college, to get gainful employment and complicate his life in general.  Plus the father and sons  could lose their apartment depending upon lease terms.  I would not want to complicate someone's life by calling about this situation but would definitely not allow my child to hang out there.  I understand why others may have a strong viewpoint the other way.

[gardenmom5]

2 hours ago, annandatje said:

I should have clearly stated that I do not believe marijuana is especially harmful, which is primarily why I would pass.  Of course,  financial distress would not be a deterrent to a crime I would report.  We have no solid information from original poster that subpar father/officer is involved in the marijuana sales.  With nationwide eternal electronic records, a drug conviction for a drug I consider harmless could affect the young adult's ability to get loans for college, to get gainful employment and complicate his life in general.  Plus the father and sons  could lose their apartment depending upon lease terms.  I would not want to complicate someone's life by calling about this situation but would definitely not allow my child to hang out there.  I understand why others may have a strong viewpoint the other way.

how about the robberies that are more likely to occur where there is a stash of product?  is that "harmful"?   what if the robbers hit the wrong apartment?  what if they hit an apartment with young children? (it happens.  all. the. time.  a lot of gun violence - is due to drugs).  do those people have the right to a reasonable expectation of not being robbed because the security officer for their complex has drug running going on out of his apartment?

then there's the property crimes so stolen goods can be sold so they can buy their drugs they want to use.

what about every other resident of that complex?  do they deserve to have their lives disrupted by drug trafficking where they live?